PS.
I was talking to one of the upper management guys, who is my buddies godson, at his grandmothers funeral at the beginning of the season and Devers name came up in the conversation by me.
Did I do that?
This was a fun interview but at about 3:30 or so he brings up the trade. The announcers mention a couple of the throw-ins "I don't know who that is. College? I don't care about college."
The most boring games are 6 to 0 in the 2nd inning, one pitcher doesn't have it and his team's bats are limp too. Not so lopsided that it's fun/funny, everyone has to keep trying, but also after the third inning you're pretty sure it's not going to get better. Although in the Dodger blowout the other day, they put a position player in to pitch and he gave up five runs including a grand slam, so that was fun: short term goal: make the Dodgers get a real pitcher up in the bullpen. Check. Make the Dodgers call a real pitcher in to relieve the position player. Check. Then keep scoring runs and win the game on a 2-out 12-run rally. No check.
I like lots of action, lots of hits and runs on both sides - for me, that's intensity.
One fan's intensity is another fan's boredom, I guess.
The most boring games are 6 to 0 in the 2nd inning, one pitcher doesn't have it and his team's bats are limp too. Not so lopsided that it's fun/funny, everyone has to keep trying, but also after the third inning you're pretty sure it's not going to get better. Although in the Dodger blowout the other day, they put a position player in to pitch and he gave up five runs including a grand slam, so that was fun: short term goal: make the Dodgers get a real pitcher up in the bullpen. Check. Make the Dodgers call a real pitcher in to relieve the position player. Check. Then keep scoring runs and win the game on a 2-out 12-run rally. No check.
Those are intense! A 7â8 walkoff had to have a lot of iffy pitching and probably some misadventures in the field. I do like it when they force the defense to make a play and they can't do it, but a 1â0 game usually has some sweet defense going on. And the longer it goes, the more intense it gets.
One fan's intensity is another fan's boredom, I guess.
You know, the kind where no one scores, or even gets a hit or two?
Those are intense! A 7â8 walkoff had to have a lot of iffy pitching and probably some misadventures in the field. I do like it when they force the defense to make a play and they can't do it, but a 1â0 game usually has some sweet defense going on. And the longer it goes, the more intense it gets.
Rightâit's already sudden death for visitors now but I wholeheartedly reject the premise that shortening games is any sort of priority. If it gets to extra innings, it's probably a fun game to be watching so why would I want less of that? I already don't like the Manfred Man because it makes that Happy Fun Time Ball⢠go by too fast.
There are also instances where the game is a boring pitcher's duel and extras just make it worse.
Rightâit's already sudden death for visitors now but I wholeheartedly reject the premise that shortening games is any sort of priority. If it gets to extra innings, it's probably a fun game to be watching so why would I want less of that? I already don't like the Manfred Man because it makes that Happy Fun Time Ball⢠go by too fast.
If MLB wants to shorten games even more, perhaps they could implement "sudden death" in extra innings - whoever scores first wins. Thoughts?
Or start with the bases loaded and 1 out....or 2 outs...or have a home run hitting contest with 5 pitches each. Time the fastest player to circle the bases?
They could do a lot to shorten the game... make all games 7 innings.
It can go too far.... the experience of going to the ballpark needs to remain valuable. I've heard complaints from my kids that if you go to get something to eat and hit the bathroom that you miss an inning or two. There is also value in getting those that showed up to pay for more of everything, and not feel like the $40 to park was extortion.
There is a balance, and I think right now things are pretty good.
Location: On the edge of tomorrow looking back at Gender:
Posted:
Jun 16, 2025 - 6:47am
PS.
I was talking to one of the upper management guys, who is my buddies godson, at his grandmothers funeral at the beginning of the season and Devers name came up in the conversation by me.
Location: On the edge of tomorrow looking back at Gender:
Posted:
Jun 16, 2025 - 6:39am
rgio wrote:
Assuming they got zero in return (which I don't think is the case....but.....)
Devers was apparently unwilling to discuss playing first base or DH, and was creating a distraction... possible cancer in the locker room.
What you got in return was NOT having to pay someone who you deem as a possible problem $250M for the next 8 years. That's very valuable.
I think in a few years you may look back with a different opinion.
I agree totally.
The handwriting was on the wall when John Henry had to fly in to talk to his $300M pissy boy.
He just wasnât happy with a big payday and wanted it his way, prima donna.
With that kind of money and to show up out of shape to Spring training was the beginning of the end.
But I still would have wished for one good player instead of the 4 they got.
The salary cap has been lowered.
Now to pay the hotdog venders before they go on strike. Lowest paid in all of MLB.
This trade isnât even in the same level as the Mookie Betts trade. That one hurt.
